errors compiling 2.4.14

Steve Holmes steve at
Tue Nov 6 22:42:19 EST 2001

<hmmm> I wonder if that's why Slackware stuck with 2.2 for the mainline
kernel for 8.0 distro. I read a comment in their general README implying
that 2.2 was more stable according to them (Pat Volgerding). Let's see, I
think 2.4 was at level 5 at the time.

Quality control is important if we want to gain on that other operating
system, don't ya think?

On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Adam Myrow wrote:

> Did you attempt to build support for the "loop device" in the kernel?
> This is the devices like /dev/loop0 where you can mount a disk image as if
> it were a physical disk.  Looks like they screwed up this code with
> 2.4.14.  I tell you, the Linux kernels seem especially cranky in the 2.4.X
> series.  I don't ever recall the developers completely breaking stuff with
> updates.  Anyway, I compiled the loop support as a module, and end up
> getting unresolved symbols when trying to install it.  I hope they can get
> a 2.4.X kernel out the door without messed up code.  Of course, I don't
> see how they get *any* kernels out the door anymore given their size and
> the huge number of maintainers!
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at

More information about the Speakup mailing list